- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2001 13:25:53 -0400 (EDT)
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- cc: Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo <emmanuelle@teleline.es>, _W3C WAI XTECH <wai-xtech@w3.org>
I think I agree with what Al suggested. I think that where we use a term as a definition, we should refer it to an internationally recognised glossary where possible, and the WHO is probably as useful a body as any. But in many cases I think we want to talk about something where the precise definition of the disability in question is not really important, and I think that then we should be able to link it to a more accurate term without feeling we always have to. In general, the definition of disabilities is something of a moving target for several reasons. For most (not all) of the work we do it isn't so important what the name we use is, as what the problems we are trying to solve are. cheers Charles McCN At 12:28 PM 2001-06-05 +0200, Emmanuelle Gutiérrez y Restrepo wrote: >Hi Katie et al: > >At <http://www.who.int/icidh/>http://www.who.int/icidh/ >You will find the international directive for the classification of >diseases. >It should be kept in mind that at the moment the applicable version is the >previous one (ICIDH1) >I believe that the documents of the WAI should be adjusted to this >classification and their definitions, this way, in the entire world we will >understand of what we are speaking exactly. >I hope this information is useful. >
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 13:25:56 UTC